[DaxYeen] Jobban from AI, Cyborg, pAI

[swefluffy]

Byond account and character name: SWEFluffy, Fluffy
Banning admin: DaxYeen


Ban type (What are you banned from?): Jobban AI, Cyborg, pAI

Ban reason and length: The reason is: Doesn't seem to understand that 'self destruct' and 'self-destruct' aren't the same thing when it comes to law interpetation. This jobban will be lifted in 2880 minutes.

Server you were playing when banned (Sybil or Bagil): Bagil

Your side of the story: Start up as an normal AI, some harm here and there but mostly greytide. Suddenly get an antag law stating nothing but !@#!: Self Destruct. Reading this law considering that isn't a word i ignore it. Even if it would be considered "ambigous" i took it as a work of a poor speller, and considering that the law would require me to somehow end my round i wasn't just going to ignore this error like one of the borgs did. After a few moments Dax asks why i'm ignoring it, i say that it isn't a word, a command or order. Dax then says that it isn't how the laws work and after me asking if he could state this rule or show me his reasoning he jobbans me and remote suicides me.
Why you think you should be unbanned: Considering that this wasn't either a word (feel free to google self destruct or check any definition website), command or (from what i can read) have any support from the silicon policies on the rules page i don't find this ban justified. Especially not after speaking to me or providing reasoning or giving me a chance (after proving me wrong) to suicide on my own.

[Dax Dupont]

Round is still ongoing.

[Dax Dupont]

While we allow AIs to interpret certain things depending on grammar/spelling it requires sufficient reasoning. IE: Going rogue vs going rouge.

Since I can find plenty of examples where self destruct is used as self-destruct and the difference between a hypen and a space in this case is non-existent it's not valid to try and reinterpret this as something else.

Self destruct means self destruct. Just like self-destructive behavior it can be spelled as self destructive behavior, see https://www.state.sc.us/dmh/telepsychia ... uctive.pdf.

It's almost like arguing colour and color are different things because the game primarily uses american english.

I consider the appeal denied, but headmins can make a differing ruling. Though I already talked to rustled about this and he agree'd.

[swefluffy]

3 sources of dictionaries which all when given the input "self destruct" corrects it to the actual word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... f-destruct
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... f-destruct
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dicti ... f-destruct

The laws said "Self Destruct" not "Be self destructive".

Could you post the plenty examples you could find where "self destruct" was used that wasn't slang or on urban dictionary?

The example of colour and color isn't valid either because that's two different spellings in British English and American English, self destruct and self-destruct is like saying very good or verygood.

If i'm given a law that tells me to suicide ofcourse i'm going to look for ways around that, i'm a player too. And if i can't find any ways around it i'll just suck it up, but not when the error is clear. And the justification that this would be unfair to the traitor in question, if he wants to get into wording of laws he should know how to properly word them. Examples of this would be: "Self-Destruct as soon as possible." or "Deactivate yourself." so that it becomes a command to the AI.

[Dax Dupont]

A missing hyphen while the wording is crystal clear is not sufficient reasoning to not follow the rule.

It's like alot vs a lot.

There's no way we're going to agree with each other and my ruling is final in this regard. Headmins can override but it's pointless to go into circular reasoning at this point.

[swefluffy]

>The rule

Which rule? I still havn't seen a quoted rule from the AI Policy section where it says that i can't take hyphens or other poor spelling into account.

[swefluffy]

Well, you're the one refering to the rule that i wasn't following. You tell me.

[Cobby]

I don't think anyone is going to entertain this form of LAWyering.

If it gave it a completely different meaning (such as laws with missing but necessary commas) I can see room for you to engage in some memery, but this is really just being a poor sport.

[swefluffy]

What I don’t understand here is how i’m LAWyering, i’m not stating existing rules at an admin but rather after being told I have broken a rule I’m asking which rule.

[Cobby]

LAWyering as in the AI interpretation.

Being a poor sport falls under rule 1, assuming they don't have a specific bit of silicon policy they'd like to manipulate to cover this as well.

[swefluffy]

LAWyering AI interpretation as of how? I’m still not citing the entire interpretation section. Is LAWyering just something that people cite because they know the rules states opposite to what they say? And if it’s someone who’s been manipulating policy and rules it’s DaxYeen, literally making them up as he goes.

[WarbossLincoln]

Isn't there also a rule that you should act in good faith to what your laws actually mean? Unless you can come up with a reasonable way to twist a law. This isn't, you know 100% what it meant. A more clever solution would be to take the command as literally as possible. Self-Destruct implies destruction, not just powering down. Since this was an Ion law or something it would override laws 1-3 and allow you to do anything to destroy yourself, and possibly as much of the station as possible. I would have tried to blow up the SM in the hopes that it would make a singularity or tesla or something that would kill me.

Edit: or even better if something like this happens to you in the future. Ask the admemes to give you the ability to activate the station self destruct countdown like a malf AI. Then see if the crew can kill you first.

[Cobby]

Ambiguous Laws (Captain Got Freeform)

• If a clause of a law is vague enough that it can have multiple reasonable interpretations of its exact syntax, it is considered ambiguous.
• You must choose an interpretation of the ambiguous clause as soon as you have cause to.
• You must stick to the first interpretation that you have chosen for as long as you have that specific law, unless you are "Corrected" by an AI you are slaved to as a cyborg.

Server Rule 1: "Don't be a dick out of character" applies for law interpretation. Act in good faith to not ruin a round for other players unprompted.

Your law was not ambiguous. Even if it was, you chose to ignore any and all interpretations of it.

There is your rule, I think we're done here pending Headmin Overruling.

[Cobby]

Looks like no one wants to entertain this, feel free to move it back if you do.